If they are 100% sure he did something, Y the F is he still in school and on scholarship? Kick him out of school and off the team. If they are so sure kick him out a couple weeks after the appeal instead of taking 3 months AND 5 DAYS. HOLY SHEET. Where's the Tylenol.
Bubu Thread
- Thread starter capitalcityguy
- Start date
If they are 100% sure he did something, Y the F is he still in school and on scholarship? Kick him out of school and off the team. If they are so sure kick him out a couple weeks after the appeal instead of taking 3 months AND 5 DAYS. HOLY SHEET. Where's the Tylenol.
One other clarification. Bubu may have been a walk on when he came to ISU, but he hasn't been for some time now. Heck, he wasn't even on the team for the last semester and he still wasn't a walk on - he had a basketball scholarship.
There are plenty of things. But don't play that game. A bunch of rampant speculation wouldn't be useful at this point.
If that's the case why not issue the decision immediately? Why delay 5 days past the deadline, therefore making this the issue that it is now.
Re: Register Exclusive: ISU asks Supreme Court to keep Palo off men's basketball team
So what is the sexual misconduct policy? Isn't this the same institution the sanctions a bondage club on campus?
So what is the sexual misconduct policy? Isn't this the same institution the sanctions a bondage club on campus?
a) "staff members" is pretty vague.
That could mean the receptionist in the College of Engineering departmental office, a lab technician who works in Gilman, an animal caretaker who cleans cages at the Vet school...you get my drift, I'm sure. Most "staff members" would not be privy to much more detailed information than the rest of us are, unless they are on the edges of the tight circle surrounding President Leath and his legal advisors...in which case they might want to quit gossiping and remember the privacy acts they may be breaking.
b) "they say Bubu did do something"
Yeah...he did something...but again, something is pretty vague. It could range from having what he thought were consensual sexual relations with a girl to him feeding her roofies and taking advantage of her incapacitation, and everything all along that line (note that I am not defining WHAT he did, merely the range that your "something" could feasibly cover)
c) "they are 100% sure he did something"...
Being 100% sure he did something is not the same thing as having proof. "She said he did it, therefore he did it" does not constitute proof. Remember those LaCross players down south, a few years back? Many people were 100% certain they did something too...
Last edited:
Re: Register Exclusive: ISU asks Supreme Court to keep Palo off men's basketball team
Leathe has the right to ban him from the basketball team (though I think that should be in the hands of the coach and a.d.), and BuBu has the right to take him to court if he feels the additional punishment is unfair, which is what he is doing. Based on how other cases were handled (Albert Gary and David Irving to name just two), it looks like BuBu has a very good case, especially when you consider Leathe obviously delayed his decision until BuBu couldn't transfer as other inconsistencies in his decision. For Leathe, J.P and the BOR to claim that the courts shouldn't or can't interfere in university business seems incredible to me. That sounds like the claim made by universities in the old south to keep black students from playing sports. I'm sure their battle cry was similar to what we've heard from our officials, that we have the right to do what we want with our students and stay out of our business. Incredibly arrogant and naïve to think the courts can't be involved when someone feels they have been judged and treated unfairly by their university officials. This is still America where people have their right to their day in court. If a case is frivolous it can be thrown out, as many are. This one isn't being thrown out for very good reasons. ISU officials have treated BuBu very differently than other ISU athletes who have obviously broken the student code, a code that is so general and vague that almost every ISU student could probably be accused of breaking it to some degree if the president so chose. Now that the details of what happened are out there, what Leathe did appears to be terribly unjust as well as outright cruel to BuBu by delaying his decision. This is a free country with constitutional rights and BuBu has every right to take Leathe and the BOR to court to seek justice. For Leathe, JP, or anybody else to not undersand that is mind boggling.
Leathe has the right to ban him from the basketball team (though I think that should be in the hands of the coach and a.d.), and BuBu has the right to take him to court if he feels the additional punishment is unfair, which is what he is doing. Based on how other cases were handled (Albert Gary and David Irving to name just two), it looks like BuBu has a very good case, especially when you consider Leathe obviously delayed his decision until BuBu couldn't transfer as other inconsistencies in his decision. For Leathe, J.P and the BOR to claim that the courts shouldn't or can't interfere in university business seems incredible to me. That sounds like the claim made by universities in the old south to keep black students from playing sports. I'm sure their battle cry was similar to what we've heard from our officials, that we have the right to do what we want with our students and stay out of our business. Incredibly arrogant and naïve to think the courts can't be involved when someone feels they have been judged and treated unfairly by their university officials. This is still America where people have their right to their day in court. If a case is frivolous it can be thrown out, as many are. This one isn't being thrown out for very good reasons. ISU officials have treated BuBu very differently than other ISU athletes who have obviously broken the student code, a code that is so general and vague that almost every ISU student could probably be accused of breaking it to some degree if the president so chose. Now that the details of what happened are out there, what Leathe did appears to be terribly unjust as well as outright cruel to BuBu by delaying his decision. This is a free country with constitutional rights and BuBu has every right to take Leathe and the BOR to court to seek justice. For Leathe, JP, or anybody else to not undersand that is mind boggling.
I don't find anywhere in the court documents where ISU or the AG argued that the team members would be in danger from Palo if Palo remained on the team. The only argument I find regarding harm to other students is on and around page 15, where it says (paraphrase) that the harm could come because students would be dissuaded from reporting sexual misconduct crimes against athletes because of the perception that there would be no consequences.
If such a claim was made by ISU or the AG that Palo presented a danger to his team members is in the court documents, could you provide a page reference? As far as I can tell, removal from the team was a sanction for violating the sexual misconduct code, and had nothing to do with him presenting a physical danger to his teammates. Again, if my interpretation is wrong, please provide a reference.
Regarding the timing, that is a good question, and I hope an answer is given at some point.
Last edited:
I'll see if I can find it this evening and get back to you. Fair enough? Don't want you to think I'm ignoring your question.
Quick response tho, off the top of my head:
If we're looking for logical...I keep coming back to this: at various levels, it has been stated that Bubu would present a danger to other students if he was not disciplined by removing him from the team. I fail to see how he would present a danger to Georges, Mel, DeAndre, Dustin, Percy, et al (men who are clearly larger, likely much stronger than him), but would not present a danger to all of the co-eds on campus that he interacts with on a daily basis, as a scholarship student in good standing.
First, change the way you highlighted what I wrote - The sentence beginning with "I fail to see" is entirely my interpretation and opinion.
Second, since the only challenged punishment levied on Bubu was removal from the team, then to me it follows that his removal from the team was punishment, supposedly because he was considered a danger to other students. That's where the logic comes in. If he's a danger to other students, don't just remove him from the team. Remove him from the University.
Last edited:
Re: Register Exclusive: ISU asks Supreme Court to keep Palo off men's basketball team
The violation is the non-consensual part. To this point, Palo's lawyers have not directly challenged Leath's finding on this point.
The violation is the non-consensual part. To this point, Palo's lawyers have not directly challenged Leath's finding on this point.
Last edited:
I was under the impression that the ruling in Bubu's case that Leath made his decision on what is similar to that of a civil trial. The preponderance of evidence. Which basically comes down to who do you believe more based on the circumstantial evidence. If Leath believed something happened that night that violated the code of conduct, that is all he needs to make the decision he did.
If their decision was based on the desire to not appear to be favoring an athlete in allegations of sexual assault, isn't that essentially admitting that his guilt is immaterial?
I'm not taking a shot at you. I realize you are just relaying what was in there.
I have a philosophical question. What message does it send about lying in an investigation and tampering with evidence. Shouldn't there be consequences for that? I would hope there would be a message in there somewhere to future victims that if they want there to be consequences for their attackers, they should not be stupid and torpedo the case.
I still am not getting why Bubu and why not any of the other athletes who have broken the law and still remained eligible to participate with no or much shorter suspensions. It seems to me that a full season suspension is just about the most stringent suspension we have seen for one of these things. It's a rhetorical question since I'm sure none of us probably have the information to answer that.
If they are looking at a preponderance of evidence, the only thing they have is that she may have been "too drunk" to give consent. Bear in mind, the ACJ ruled that the evidence in the case did not meet the "preponderance of evidence" criteria and that the allegations were groundless.
Re: Register Exclusive: ISU asks Supreme Court to keep Palo off men's basketball team
Haven't read all the responses but I couldn't wait on this one. So you really had to slip in the O.J. case in this discussion? Dispicable. But since you brought it up, why hasn't the girl brought a civil action against BuBu? Maybe because she was caught lying to the county attorney's office and tried to fabricate evidence? And now she's left the state, reportedly with her boyfriend. You really want to keep defending Leathe and JP as they help her continue to create chaos in BuBu's life?
Haven't read all the responses but I couldn't wait on this one. So you really had to slip in the O.J. case in this discussion? Dispicable. But since you brought it up, why hasn't the girl brought a civil action against BuBu? Maybe because she was caught lying to the county attorney's office and tried to fabricate evidence? And now she's left the state, reportedly with her boyfriend. You really want to keep defending Leathe and JP as they help her continue to create chaos in BuBu's life?
I'm not sure exactly what you are asking, but it doesn't say that avoiding the appearance of favoring athletes was the reason for the sanction. It says that staying the sanction would give the appearance of favoring athletes.
Yes, there should be consequences for lying and tampering with evidence. If she tampered with evidence, it is the DA's responsibility to pursue that matter. That doesn't mean the university should disregard other undisputed evidence and Palo's admissions in making their ruling about the student code violation.
How many other cases have there been where a sexual misconduct violation was brought against an athlete? In order to make comparisons to the disposition of other student athlete cases, shouldn't the severity of the allegations be similar in the cases being compared?
Last edited:
